User talk:Cedars

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi everyone,

Welcome to my talk page. I encourage feedback and this page will allow me to respond to your comments as soon as possible. Please add new comments to the end of this page. Although I may not be able to respond to all comments, I do take the time to read them all.

Cedars 02:42, 27 January 2006 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] U.S. embargo against Cuba

You voted for U.S. embargo against Cuba, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.

[edit] Caesar cipher

Hi, thanks for your wording tweaks on Caesar cipher! — Matt Crypto 11:48, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Caulfield Grammar FAC

Hi! You previously voted to object this FAC nomination, but the article has been significantly upgraded and improved since then. I would urge you to have a second look before leaving your final vote. Thanks. Harro5 08:14, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Heya!

Great work on the copyedit of Windows 2000... I was hoping someone would do this :-) I very much appreciate your help! Oh, welcome to Wikipedia... you should create an intro page that tells us a little bit about yourself if you want. That will at least get rid of the red link to your name! - Ta bu shi da yu 04:51, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the positive comments Ta and for your work on the Windows 2000 article. :-) Cedars 12:55, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Microsoft notice board

Are you interested? I hope to get info on Microsoft related topics up2date, accurate and presented neutrally. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:44, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Education in the United States peer review

I left a response to your comment here. Would you care to elaborate further?--naryathegreat | (talk) 00:46, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits and comments. I appreciate them. I feel that enough peer review has occurred to move this forward to FAC. Do you feel you would be ready to support its nomination there? If not, why, and what would you change? Thanks again for your efforts.--naryathegreat | (talk) 23:03, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Hi narya,

Sorry for my inattentiveness I've recently been going through exams, so Wikipedia has been left to fill the gaps in my time. I've made some suggestions on the talk page of further improvements that could be made. Good work on the article so far.

Cedars 08:55, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Footnotes

Thanks for fixing the footnotes at Robert Lawson (architect) I knew there was a way like that to do it, but could not work out quite how! Thanks Giano | talk 07:27, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] GNAA FAC

Thanks for your comments. I know the nomination was FUBAR from the start, and I personally think Ta bu is making it worse. I want the article to work, but I believe User:Raul654, who has the power to promote articles, should have been watching this. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 23:59, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

One more thing, you said "Addition: It would also be helpful if the "Activities" section was broken up using subheadings." I have done so by creating three sub-headings: Website disruption, shock sites and hoaxes/spoilers. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 05:28, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] DualDisc Article

Hello. Thanks for the comments on the DualDisc article. I have addressed all the points you mentioned on the FAC discussion page. If you have any other comments, please let them be known. Cheers! --K1vsr (talk) 00:34, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks again for the additional comments. I've addressed the second round of comments you had. Please review. Cheers! --K1vsr (talk) 19:11, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
I did some further re-working of the section on competition with SACDs. If you still think it needs something, then let me know. I left out the bit about market share because there don't really seem to be any hard statistics on DualDisc vs. SACD. There are plenty of statistics on SACD vs. DVD-Audio, but that's not relevant to DualDisc. Cheers! --K1vsr (talk) 16:56, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] DualDisc FAC

Hey Cedars. Thanks for all your feedback on the article. The nomination failed the first time around, but I have re-submitted it as an FAC. I was wondering if you'd consider supporting it this time around? Cheers! --K1vsr (talk) 15:35, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Columbine High School massacre

Hey, thank you for adding the rationale for some of the pics. Can you please help me with the others, I can tell you where I got them. Most are found in websites throughout the internet so I figure they're probably not copyrighted or released into the PD. This is the first time I have added images to wikipedia so I'm not quite sure how to fix the copyrights. Thanks! PRueda29

I removed it from peer review because about a week passed without anyone commenting on it. I removed it from featured article status because I had plenty of suggestions and someone told me to reffer it to peer review before submitting it to FAC, which being new at this I didn't know. Thank you for your help, you basically fixed the one huge problem I didn't know how to fix. I'm going to submit it to FAC again. - PRueda29

Thanks for your support on getting the Columbine High School massacre article featured, and with the rationale for the pictures. I wanted to let you know that it will be featured on the front page on September 18th. - PRueda29 13:33 10 September 2005 (UTC)
No problem. Your work was really at the core of making the article a featured one and on behalf of the community I also wanted to thank you for that. Cedars 09:22, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Phase-shift keying peer review

Hi there! Thanks for commenting on Splash's peer review at Phase-shift keying. I just started this project, and perhaps you might be interested in participating? Anyway, just thought you might be interested. We could really use some extra help! --HappyCamper 11:09, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] BEST

Hi. WRT to the BEST FAC, I would like to know

  1. I have no references stating that the Bombay Omnibus Company existed or was a proposed company then. If I modify the text to "an existing company", it may be incorrect. I would prefer not to modify.
  2. resulting in the BEST securing a complete monopoly over bus services in the Greater Bombay area has been modified to That year the Undertaking and private operators went to court with the BEST asking for a complete closure of the private companies. The case dragged on for four years before the Supreme Court of India granted the organisation a complete monopoly over bus services in the Greater Bombay area. Is this Ok, or should is there somthing you still want addressed?
  3. Quantity of power. I'm waiting for a reply email. If I don't get one in time, would a dated (1998 exact, or 2002 approx) figure do?
  4. Is the company expected to maximize profit. I think all companies would like to maximize profits, please let me know what is meant by that.
  5. Is there anything else in mind you would like to see?

Thanks, User:Nichalp/sg 06:17, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]  

Hi I've rolled back your removal of the nonbreaking space to the BEST article. According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Units, the nonbreaking space is required (#8) 'to ensure it does not break lines'. User:Nichalp/sg 09:41, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

That's cool. Cedars 09:48, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Belarusian Republican Youth Union

While I am not going to remove the article from FAC, I am going to have myself and others do a complete grammar check of the article. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 06:53, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reading directions

Hi, when you added that listing to WP:RfD, did you happen to see the note about 2 lines above where your edit was: "New entries go at the **BOTTOM** of the page"? No problem, I moved it, but in the future, please read directions. Sorry to be so bureacratic, but it makes more work for other people (unless we want to wind up with a giant mess); in this case, not so much, but in other cases (e.g. people who move pages with cut-and-paste), lots of work. Noel (talk) 15:15, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Heya

Any chance on some help with copy-editing MDAC? I'm getting worse at this sort of thing - not better :( 203.134.166.99 03:34, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Denis Law FAC

Hi,

You objected to the images on Denis Law a day or two ago. Since then, one of them has been removed and the other has been cropped and tidied up. Please could you have a look at the article and let me know if you have any remaining objections, or change your vote to neutral or support if not?

Thanks, CTOAGN 11:15, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

Hmm. That is a nice picture, but I wanted to remove some pictures from that page. Anyway, as long as you're going in the right direction, that's ok to me. :) --Phroziac(talk) 14:06, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of transformer pic on electrical engineering page

Just curious why you deleted pic of transformer. Followed up and saw in your edits. I'm sure you are aware since you know this page Scott 13:50, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi Scott,

The reasons for deleting the power transformer image from the electrical engineering page were:

  1. The image has an unsightly time stamp.
  2. The photo was taken on a tilt.
  3. The setting of the photo is not aesthetically pleasing.
  4. There was a request from Phroziac that the pictures in the article be minimized.
  5. Having two pictures for the power engineering part was inconsistent with the other items in the list.

In short, I appreciate you uploading the image but I just felt it wasn't the right image for the article.

Cedars 15:29, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Ah I see, OK Scott 15:34, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tesla`s picture

Hi Cedars! Whit all respect, I must tell you that Tesla`s picture must be on that article together whit Edison`s. I do not understand your reasons why Tesla`s picture can't be in article... Tesla is one of the biggest scientists of Electrical engineering. Regards, --M. Pokrajac 11:10, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] New Engineering Wiki

Engineering Wiki is a wiki entirely dedicated to collecting information about Engineering. I invite you to join this wiki.

[edit] University of Michigan - suggestions needed

I saw that you have looked over two university articles that are or once were on FAC. I was wondering if you would mind looking at the University of Michigan article, which I am trying to get featured. However, at the moment I am out of ideas of how to improve it further. Thanks. Pentawing 06:42, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

  • I was wondering if you can get a chance to look over the article and comment on it further? Thanks. Pentawing 20:55, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
    • I briefly looked at it a while ago and was very impressed, I may have time for a more in depth look in a week's time (right now I'm studying for exams :-(). Cedars 12:38, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Baby Gender Mentor

Hello Cedars, thank you very much for your suggestions at the peer review for Acu-gen. Following your suggestion, I swtiched Baby Gender Mentor with Acu-Gen so that the former is now the article. I have also made substantial updates and improvements to the article. If you have the opportunity to re-read the article and offer further advice, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks! Johntex\talk 21:50, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] re: Electrical engineering

Mate, you do good work. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 06:03, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Electrical Engineering

You are in danger of violating the three revert rule. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from further editing. --Barberio 02:21, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Hes already violated 3RR look at his contributions over last 24 hrs--Light current 03:00, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reversions on globalisation tag

You have exceeded 3 reversions in 24 hours on electrical engineering with regard to the globalisation tag. I shall therefore be reporting your violation of the 3 revert rule--Light current 02:59, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Please list the four reverts. Cedars 03:01, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Here they are:

  1. 03:47, 27 November 2005 (hist) (diff) m Electrical engineering (moved tag to talk page - equally there are two people who want it on the talk page)
  2. 02:57, 27 November 2005 (hist) (diff) m Electrical engineering (removed tag)
  3. 01:25, 27 November 2005 (hist) (diff) m Electrical engineering (move systematic bias tag to talk page)
  4. 11:11, 26 November 2005 (hist) (diff) m Electrical engineering (move systematic bias tag to talk page)

--Light current 03:22, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Electrical engineering

Please join the discussion on electrical engineering and note the consensus for change.--Light current 13:11, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Let us please try to work togther and reach consensus. Please discuss your concerns on the talk page before changing things. THe new pages are in the process of recreation. THis is not the final situation, so lets hammer out a compromise to statisfy a worldwide view. Please read the discussions you have missed whilst you have been away and respond to those before getting into edit wars. We are prepared to listen to well reasoned argument!--Light current 13:20, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

You have no consensus for your version since the poll was a sham asmany editors agree. Please do not revert the page. Others have been discussing the problem while you were away and we are coming to a common understanding. Its a pity you were not prepared to contribute to these early suggestions, but you didnt. Please do not NOW upset the apple cart uneccesarily. But please feel free to comment contructively on the proposed changes. Saying you dont like the new page or you prefer the old page without giving reasons is not helpful.--Light current 13:40, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Constant reversion without discussion and agreement is not the Wiki way and could lead you to being blocked!! Please think on this--Light current 14:15, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User page

Sorry about editing your user page- my mistake. OH NO!!!!--Light current 13:42, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Please STOP interfering with reconstruction work on electrical / electronics eng. Electrical eng will cease to exist as a separate page shortly. If you wanted to comment on the process, you should have done it when I first put out requests for comments, not now. Sulking Johnnny come latelys cannot be accommodated on WP.--Light current 01:25, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Well it DID have a redirect notice before someone removed it. Stop playing games and try to cooperate in the spirit of WP--Light current 02:48, 6 December 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Illegal removing of tags

Quote from rules- please NOTE WELL:--Light current 04:19, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

You may edit the article during the discussion

You and others are welcome to continue editing the article during the discussion period. Indeed, if you can address the points raised during the discussion by improving the article, you are encouraged to edit a nominated article (noting in the discussion that you have done so if your edits are significant ones).

There are, however, a few restrictions upon how you may edit an article:

  • You must not blank the article (unless it is a copyvio).

* You must NOT modify or remove the AFD notice.

  • You must not rename the article unless you rename the associated discussion page(s) in parallel and update the section headings on the discussion page(s) to note the old and new names. If done, it's usually best to move the AFD sub-page immediately before the article page, since this ensures no links are broken, even if somebody visits a page in the middle of the changes.
  • You should not turn the article into a redirect. A functioning redirect will overwrite the AFD notice. It may also be interpreted as an attempt to "hide" the old content from scrutiny by the community.
  • You should exercise extreme caution before merging any part of the article. If you are bold but the community ultimately decides to delete the content, all your mergers must be undone. (This is necessary in order to remain compliant with the requirements of GFDL. Although Mediawiki now displays author information for deleted articles, it has not yet been settled whether this fulfils the GFDL requirements for the case of merging deleted articles into other articles.) It is far better to wait until the discussion period is complete unless there is a strong case for merge under the deletion policy.

You seem to be asking to be blocked - just carry on like this and you will be!

+:What is your reason for reinserting the history section? This should be on its own page called History of electrical engineering or something. THis would make the page flow a lot better I think and of course reduce it overburdening size somewhat.--Light current 05:18, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Your (last) go

You dont seem to be getting the hang of this Wikipedia business do you? You are supposed to discuss things -- not just midlkesly revert 2 or 3 times every 24 hrs--Light current 01:17, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

BTW your misleading edit summaries are being noted. If you are reverting it must be declared in the edit summary.--Light current 01:34, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Extreme Ironing

You wrote, If you take a look at the references they do check out. What references? The article is missing references. It mentions a tv show and twelve newspapers and publications yet has not one URL of them. I also can't find the video on the Internet.

Anyway, I put the tag because, while patrolling recent changes, I saw an anon user insert lots of text without references. I see that the edit has been reverted, so that's the end of it. -- Perfecto 16:32, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Magnetic Lock

  • Nice lock article! Could you next time include an edit summary so we don't think it's someone dumping copyrighted material? Great stuff, though!! -Tux256ac 05:06, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Virtual band PR

This article is now up for its third peer review. Please feel free to make their contributions. --JB Adder | Talk 21:13, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Box Office

These Box Office figures are secret from the Julian Thome Pictures Company and they are the total Box Office: Cinema, TV, Video, DVD!

I imagine you realize that there is no "Julian Thome Pictures Company". See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julian Thome, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Film by Julian Thome, etc. -GTBacchus(talk) 19:59, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] electrical engineering

I agree with you—like you, I'm an engineering student trying to get articles related to my major featured. I'm working on dealing with the style/formatting problems that I and others have brought up so that this can be featured (I just converted the subdisciplines section to summary style as per my original comment and comments by Nichalp and nixie). However, since I'm not an EE student, I don't have lots of references laying around that can verify the content of the article—with a couple good general EE books, it shouldn't be too tough to get this well sourced. If you don't have access to that, let me know and I'll head to my university's library to see if I can dig anything up. --Spangineer (háblame) 02:57, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reasons for my changes (copy)

Hi Light current,

I realize we've had some difficulty creating a proper dialogue [1] but I really want to sort these changes out. So hopefully this helps you understand the reason for my changes:

  • The reference to the "pneumatic tranducer circuit" is overly technical and is in contrast to the make technical articles accessible guideline so I am going to return to the tuner circuit.
  • The history section is far too lengthy relative to other parts of the article so I am going to try to trim it down but please feel free to add a more in-depth discussion of the history to the history of electrical engineering article.
  • The discussion of enigma and world war two is unnecessary in such a concise discussion of the history of electrical engineering.
  • The radar and magnetron are relevant developments so I am going to keep them with references to their history.

I really hope this resolves our dispute. Please consider that these changes were not easy to make, I had to spend a fair 30 minutes looking for references on the magnetron and radar as well as reviewing all the changes and copying text from old versions, etc.

Cedars 02:43, 22 January 2006 (UTC)</nowiki>

[edit] 3RR WARNING

You have reverted electrical engineering 3 times within 24 hrs. Next time you will be reported.--Light current 01:34, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Report new violation

Place new reports ABOVE this header, using the template below. Do not edit the template itself. See the example at the top of the page for full details. Take the time to do the job right to get the quickest responses. From the article's History page, use diffs (links labelled "last"), not versions, and the "compare versions" button to clearly highlight the changes between versions of the article and show what has been reverted.

Three revert rule violation on ARTICLENAME (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs). USERNAME (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log):

  • Previous version reverted to: [Link Time]
  • 1st revert: [DiffLink Time]
  • 2nd revert: [DiffLink Time]
  • 3rd revert: [DiffLink Time]
  • 4th revert: [DiffLink Time]

Reported by: Light current 03:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC) Do you really want me to fill this in?--Light current 03:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your Encouragment

Even though the Template that I created was deleted and poorly received, thank you for your encouragement. You are the only person who looked at it and at least made me feel that I did something worthwhile.

Lady Aleena | Talk 07:54, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

No problem, I am glad I could help. Cedars 02:21, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Electrical engineering

I see Electrical engineering recently acquired Featured Article status, primarily due it seems to your efforts. Let me offer my congratulations! BillC 16:48, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your encouragement Bill! Cedars 14:36, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] UWA

Hi Cedars, I noticed you're a student of UWA. You might be interested in this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedians_by_alma_mater:University_of_Western_Australia Cheers, Serephine 14:39, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice Serephine. I've added the category to my page. :-) Cedars 00:47, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Featured!

I just wanted to let you know that Pink Floyd is now a featured article. Thanks a ton for supporting the candidacy! - dharmabum 22:59, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Root page template

Hi Lindosland,

I have removed the root page template from electrical engineering. I feel that the template is unappealing and adds little but confusion to the page.

I hope you will understand.

Cedars 23:36, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, but did you read Root page first? This concept is being used to coordinate editing on big topics. Another editor has supported the idea, saying that it is overdue, and urgently needed to sort out the mess on Electronics, which is now proceeding. I back-linked Electronics to Electrical engineering as this seemed sensible, and that made Electrical engineering a root page. I would have thought it could usefully use the concept which aids coordinated editing as well as navigation forwards and backwards. It's a tricky concept, which we have been working on for some time, and which many fail to see the value of at first. --Lindosland 23:58, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Wikipedia: Userbox policy poll

I left a comment regarding your "Strong oppose" on the Wikipedia: Userbox policy poll. I've reproduced it below. Please reply on the main page. JesseW, the juggling janitor 00:08, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Users will remain totally free to "express their political opinions through user boxes including if they belong to a particular group or religion". This proposal does not restrict what users may write on their user pages. Please clarify your objection. -- JesseW, the juggling janitor 00:05, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My Brisbane photo

I am more than happy for you to use my photo in this way. The very reason I released it under the GFDL. Looks rather sweeeet in the screenshot. :-) -- Gaz 01:16, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GameRanger

Cedars, I want to thank you for your efforts in cleaning up the GameRanger article in response to the AfD. In light of your changes I've added a Keep vote with cites for notability. Here's hoping the article survives. — digitaleon • talk @ 14:32, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Good article

I was in the process of removing the excess template good article. -- getcrunkjuicecontribs 01:37, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] lostprophet

The problem is the bot on the talk page kept picking it up as a missing article if I didn't capitalize it, apparently all Wiki articles have to start with a capital letter due to technical restrictions :/. Homestarmy 13:38, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GAauto question

Your gaauto.pl script automatically dropped two articles I recently added to the good article page. How can this be avoided? Thx, Vir 18:46, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks much for the explanation at my user page :) Vir 00:49, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

hey hey hey ````Worlock eats 06:31, 12 March 2006 (UTC)````

[edit] Cedars: Mais oui!, Phase4: Mais non!

Hi Cedars,

I've left a message for you on my talk page.Phase4 15:58, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed new look for Good article page

Hi Cedars, You'll see the new look proposal for the GA page has taken you colour scheme concern on board. I'd really appreciate it if you take a look and post you feedback. I couldn't really support the version you mentioned as it did not contain edit links for complete sections. When experimenting with versions I found that without this, sections were a real pain to change around. TheGrappler also did sterling work on categorisations within the section which I think will make it much easier to find articles for viewing, and easier for editors to include and remove articles. Cheers SeanMack 16:46, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Electrical engineering

Please take a look at my (long) proposal for taking care of the Electrical Engineering article name problem at Talk:Electrical_and_electronics_engineering#Page_splitting_or_renaming.3F. Thanks! —Spangineer[es] (háblame) 18:55, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Electrical and electronics engineering

Thanks for the comments. Makes sense to do it the way you propose, though at this point, it may not be necessary. Spangineer's latest proposal seems sound, though it still seems it would clutter the electrical engineering page. -- Superdosh 21:26, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Filmographies

I noticed you've changed the order of filmographies to newest first. I'd like to point out that Zzzzz changed Wikipedia:Filmographies to suit his argument that it should be oldest first and has made threats to delist and has followed through on several pages based on the wikipedia page that he changed. Hardly sounds like consensus and more like bad faith editting to me. Please see Wikipedia talk:Filmographies for discussion. Cburnett 03:46, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I have no problem with either arrangement. I just didn't want to see articles kicked off the GA list for such a frivilous reason and it seemed better to address the reason and reinstate them than fight the delisting. I do feel kind of cheated that all that work was now for nothing (given that the changes were just reverted). Cedars 05:34, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GAAuto

Oops, sorry, I should have given you a heads up for that really! SeanMack discovered the idea on his sandpit version - it's pretty neat because it now means edit summaries will contain the section name. So I copied the idea over. Both of us think it's worth going with, so that some of the edit summaries will look less mysterious! Thanks for the warning. TheGrappler 16:18, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

2:1

Guess! Im sure a person of your intelligence will soon work it out--Light current 01:00, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Armor for Sleep
Afro-punk
Hawthorne Heights
Fat Wreck Chords
Remains of the Day (band)
Mad Caddies
The Kids Will Have Their Say
Fire Party
NMAM Institute of Technology
Electronics and Communications Engineering
Underground rock
Bouncing Souls
Samiam
7 Seconds
Roger Miret and the Disasters
Ten Foot Pole
List of black hardcore/punk musicians
Steve Jocz
Dag Nasty
Cleanup
Strung Out
Michael Hampton
Biomedical engineering
Merge
Punk revival
Streetpunk
Rhinoplasty (album)
Add Sources
Art-Pop/Punk/Metal
Christian hardcore
Art rock
Wikify
Millencolin
Mechanical Engineering Technology
New World ROM
Expand
Iefr
Egeria (episode of Rome)
History of electricity and radio

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 16:30, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] EE. again...

Hi there, I know all this trouble at the EE article is annoying... But why did you make the Hitachi. . . pic smaller? I don't know what it looks like on your screen, but here it now shows a big empty space between that image and the Contents box. Of course, if you have your contents box deactivated, there would be just a large image, and that would look bad as well...

It keeps things peaceful, yeah, I know what you mean... I was considering putting those two images in with the EE (terminology) article and putting the Mm pic up (or something...). But I better suggest it at the EE talk page first. VdSV9•♫ 18:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Al Leong

Actually, if you take a look at the Al Leong page (not the talk page), you'll see I just moved a GA tag from the article to the talk page. I think that was an appropriate move, though it doesn't really qualify as a GA. --Keflavich 13:27, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

No worries. I'm glad you noticed that it didn't deserve the distinction. --Keflavich 14:52, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA Tom Cousineau

Problem with the Tom Cousineau article are images that is why you failed it, sadly there no PD or GFDL images avalible and the only image I found a magazine cover that was later deleted as copyvio. No other images that isn't pure copyvio. I don't think thats a valid reason to decline a GA what I read. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 01:00, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] IIT article

If the Dilbert image is added to "Criticism" section where media is criticied (and the strip being taken as example), will it qualify as fair use? Also, for it, I will need to add the sentence about hindsight bias that you deleted as "confusing". I feel its important to highlight the bias people have about IITians. There might be a need to copyedit it to make it clearer, but it is essential. -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 10:34, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GAAuto

Great, thanks for implementing that :-) I checked the history page and the improvement is immediately obvious - changes from section editing are now appropriately labelled. Good stuff :) TheGrappler 21:44, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] thanks for your comments at peer review

Hi Cedars. Thanks for your comments at the peer review for Poincare conjecture. I wanted to let you know that I am considering them seriously, but as the issues brought up are not minor, I will need some time before I can implement changes. Additionally, the article has unfortunately been the subject of a dispute, and my available time to edit the article has been taken up by that. But I fully intend to give the article a reworking based on your comments in the next week or so. --Chan-Ho (Talk) 06:50, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] thanks for your comments

332nd Engineer General Service Regiment. I have improved the section about the training, please let me know your thoughts. Thanks very much for the help. Mfields1 00:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Computer ethics

Yeah, I guess I must be biased since I wrote the thing, but I still disagree with not promoting the article to Good Article status. According to the criteria, inline citations are desirable, but not necessary. In addition, the article does provide a sound overview of the topic. As for what it is lacking, I can attest that there simply isn't any verifiable information on the points that require further elaboration. Research on computer ethics is few and far between in both the philosophy and computing ends of academia. It seems more like we're reviewing it under the more rigorous terms of WP:FAC. Oh well. C'est la vie.--Jtalledo (talk) 10:54, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy

Greetings, I see you've relisted this article on Wikipedia:Good articles. Thanks for that. Could you possibly change the GA template on Talk:Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy as well? I'd do it myself but I think it'd be better if a more neutral third party did it. Thanks. Netscott 13:41, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Cedars. I've done a lot more than take an interest in GA; I've been involved in defending its standards, against the attempts by a group of editors to change the rules to suit their personal agenda, through a long mediation (see the talk:Disputes page). As such, I'm very much aware of how it works. I have chosen to veto the article in question, and have gone through the procedures for delisting the article as described in the GA project pages. (As an aside, I notice you also live in Perth; I wonder how many of us there are.) — JEREMY 13:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

It appears there may be a bit of an edit war on our hands. JEREMY reverted your revert on Wikipedia:Good articles I've since restored back to your version. I totally understand why you reverted Jeremy considering the article had overwhelming support to be reinstated. Netscott 13:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Peer review/Automated

I followed up on your idea, and managed to get it to work – see WP:PR/A. Even better, I managed to shrink down my suggestions to only one line. How does it look? Thanks, Andy t 16:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Actuary

Thank you very much for your helpful comments on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Actuary. You have propelled the article to somewhat expand the content there, with suitable references. I hope you enjoy it :) Thanks again! -- Avi 04:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GAAuto glitch?

Hey. I've noticed what might be a slight bug with your great GAAuto script in regards to names...this has applied to the initial additions of Jimmy Carter and Tim Foli among others. Namely, if the name is originally entered with the first name first, GAAuto will fix the name so that the last name comes first BUT it will order it as if the first name was the last name. For example, in Foli's case, the name was corrected to read Foli, Tim but it was be ordered as if the name was Tim, Foli. It has to be manually corrected to be listed properly. I'm wondering if your script can be advanced enough to so that it can be done automatically. -- transaspie 07:12, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Hershey Company

Hello Cedars. I have expanded The Hershey Company by adding in the information you added to the talk page; [2] and [3]. Hopefully the article is up to the standard of a "Good Article." Let me know if there's anything else. Regards, Iolakana|T 22:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mailing list discussion

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. There are always tradeoffs that have to be made in trying to improve the quality of our content and the freedom of others to reuse it. In this case I feel the benefits of the change would outweigh the costs. I recognize that some people feel as you do and would in fact decline to provide an email address in order to upload even if, as with the "email this user" function, it is not publicly displayed to senders. What proportion that would be is difficult to establish, which was precisely the point of my post, but I do think it would be a relatively unusual choice. I'll grant that mailing list participants may not be entirely representative of the relevant population, but I never suggested otherwise. --Michael Snow 16:13, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mark Hoppus

Hi Cedars, I have the same issues I had with the (+44) and AVA external links which have been cleaned-up, here is what I originally wrote :

When you should link externally : http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/When_should_I_link_externally

“Not very often. If the site you are linking to is an article, history or timeline, then wikipedia should have its own article on that subject, not just an external link. The web is already full past capacity of sites composed of links to other sites.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links

specifically adds:

“Links to normally avoid: A website that you own or maintain (unless it is the official site of the subject of the article). If it is relevant and informative, mention it as a possible link on the talk page and wait for someone else to include it, or include the information directly in the article.”

Basically a number of links are not related directly to Mark Hoppus. I feel that a "See Also" section with links to (+44) or Atticus Clothing wikipedia articles would be a better choice. What do you think?

Thanks, --MrPink 16:47, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Failed GA New England

Thanks for taking a look at the article and offering your input. It is much appreciated. Now that I think of it, the article is probably too long to be considered for good article status, anyways. What kind of changes do you think need to be made before nominating it for FA status, besides the ones you already suggested? I'll get to work on those soon, by the way. There are indeed some writing problems in the article. It just needs a bit of a comb-through. Thanks again, and happy editing. =) --AaronS 02:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notability

As per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:BIO published authors are notable. The guidelines do not say whether it is Junior/Senior or Fiction/ Nonfiction etc Is it correct or notDoctor Bruno 07:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

(Sort of related) I see why you were able to put the Notable Wikipedians tag on my discussion page. I have been told by someone in Wikipedia that I cannot start an article on myself, but someone else can, and I can add details (provided NPOV and verifiable) - do you think you could do me a favour and create an article called Paul Morrison, then you (or I) could just cut and paste the contents of User:Jpaulm into it. This would make life quite a bit easier :-) Jpaulm 14:28, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer on MyTalk - makes sense! Maybe one day I'll have a few drinks and do it myself! Regards Jpaulm 23:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mike Matusow GA

Thanks for taking the time to review and comment on the GA nomination I made for Mike Matusow. I have made the change you requested. Hopefully I now have my first Good Article! Essexmutant 16:53, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Globular clusters

Please verify that this change is correct and I will promote globular clusters to a good aritcle.

Yes that's an improvement in the wording. Thank you. — RJH (talk) 15:14, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GAAuto

Something odd hppened with your script- I was looking at the New GAs, and I see Zero (Mega Man), which has been a GA since May 22nd, and was never delisted. --PresN 16:39, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

The script relists articles that have moved recently. This is useful for keeping an eye on unstable articles. Cedars 01:51, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Automated teller machine

Good suggestions in the peer review. Thanks. After a trim or two, I'll take another run at GA.PrimroseGuy 21:28, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Search Toppers

PLEASE READ: for those of you who are doubters, please notice no back link to the website wich would be the case if one was self promotion, and further more if you have a phone with a web brouser go to searchtoppers.tv and view a demo of the search toppers mobile streaming technology in action. the mobile streaming transfer rate is greater than 24 frames per second (HD). It works on all carriers except verizon who has not lowered their "wall garden". search and lear about carrier wall gardens then you can look up H.264 technology without disclosing patent pending information you can easily see searctoppers is who they claim to be. Thank you in advance for the time it will take you to confirm.

[edit] Telecommunication

Might the "Accessibility" paragraph fit in better at the end of the "Modern Operations" section? This is just a suggestion, as you may have good reasons for wanting it where it is now. But just a thought. MLilburne 13:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I've passed the article. Congrats! MLilburne 14:01, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Concern about the GA status of Mike Matusow

Howdy! I recently failed the article Ram Vaswani due to concerns about the lack reliable sources among others things. One of the editors on that article's talk page put this article and it's GA status up as a comparision point. In looking at the Matusow's article, I see that it has the same issue with using blogs/internet forum as the majority of it's sources, which don't stack up with the guidelines listed in WP:RS. I also have minor concern about the inclusion of the Trivia section but again that is minor compared with the lack of reliable sources. My concerns may lead me to want to de-list the article, but I would want to discuss that with you first for your views. I appreciate your time. Agne 03:03, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Comment - I have expanded the lead, and raised a discussion re: reliable sources at Talk:Reliable sources. Essexmutant 10:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Moving comment from my talk page to keep discussion centralized

Hi Agne,

After some consideration I still stand by my decision to promote Mike Matusow.

Most of the article's personal details come from Poker Player Magazine's Me and My Big Mouth - an interview which presumably remains faithful to what Matusow said. The Hendon Mob references are used largely to report the way particular tournaments have played out something that is less likely to be exposed to rumour.

I imagine it may be difficult to find authoritative references about modern poker players so I am quite comfortable with the choice of references. I also view the good article standard as a more relaxed standard compared to featured articles so that is probably why the issue of reliable sources concerns me less with good articles. Cedars 05:26, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

We still have a conflict with WP:RS and I appreciate Essexmutant's effort to get it clarified over on the policy's talk page. I will wait on making an action to de-list the article till things are settled there. As for GA standards, I guess I take the slogan The standards of GA are only as high as our weakest article to heart. Coupled with the fact that this is a WP:BLP, I would tend not to approach these reviews with relaxed expectations. Agne 17:45, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Elec eng page

I feel you are dispalying a degree of obstinacy in your refusal to discuss these changes you wish to make. Im not sure that you yet understand the processes and behavioral standards on WP. Please do not make major changes without agreement. This is the WP rule (above WP:BOLD). If you continue to change without discussion, I may have to report your actions to the Admin notice board.--Light current 00:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Light current,
Please feel free to report my behaviour to the admin notice board. I feel that making a selection of changes to improve the article, restoring those changes, asking for reasons why those changes were reverted (receiving none) and then restoring those changes again once they were reverted again without explanation is entirely defendable.
Cedars 00:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] KDE

Since nobody else seemed to respond, I've gone ahead and fixed the two points you raised about the GA nomination of KDE. I hope things are clearer now. Regards, Samsara (talk • contribs) 16:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You are welcome

The lead felt like it needed an image, so I did a quick Commons search and found the mobile image. Glad you like it! Batmanand | Talk 09:44, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Óengus I of the Picts

GAAuto keeps removing this article from the GA page...Not sure why, as it is a GA. I've re-added it a couple of times. It's in history, under historical figures. --PresN 20:19, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that...I can't figure out why it is doing it yet but I will try to keep an eye on the article. Thanks for the bug report. Cedars 00:39, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Telecoms

Hi, it might be a good idea if you asked some FAC regulars directly to have a look at the article since it doesn't seem to be getting much attention on FAC.--Peta 06:03, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GAAauto error?

It seems to of removed a Typhoon and Black Marsh, and I think those are both still GA's :/. Homestarmy 00:39, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Homestarmy,
Black Marsh still appears to be listed under the "Fictional sites" category. It was removed from the recently added list but I don't think it was ever removed from the "Fictional sites" category.
Cedars 02:02, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lloyd Levitin

I have added a comment countering TruthbringerToronto 's argument on the Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lloyd_Levitin page. Please read it and consider changing your vote. Thanks. --Ineffable3000 02:22, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Something you might be interested in

Since you requested deletion for the One Peice attacks, I thought you could help out here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Dragon Ball special abilities. Hydromasta231 04:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] James Robert Baker

Thank you for that formatting edit you made to the article I wrote (the BDSM, gay-bondage fix). I had tried multiple times to make that fix, but could never get it to come out the way you did. It now looks exactly like I wanted it to, and I learned how to do it by going into the edit page to see how you formatted it. Thanks for the much needed improvement. Jeffpw 09:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

No problem, I am glad I could help. Cedars 23:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Of bots and Good Articles

Hi,

There's a discussion of bot use at Wikipedia talk:Good articles. I'm new; not sure who does what. But apparently you have a bot that does related tasks. Thought you might wanna chime in. --Ling.Nut 00:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] MIT

The article on MIT has undergone some significant changes over the last month to prepare for a peer review and nomination for Featured Article. Because you have contributed previously, please review the changes and the discussion board. Madcoverboy 18:54, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA nomination of OFDM

I think that the improvements that you suggested in talk:Orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing are addressed. Do you think that the OFDM article once again should be nominated as a good article? Mange01 13:17, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

Note the trial - in short it's to see what it actually does, it's kinda hard to judge without diffs :). As for the whole community image thing, it's an issue for sure, but copyright issues I'd have to say are a greater legal issue in most cases. As long as it leaves a nice edit summary w/ a link to an FAQ page which I suspect it will, it seems to be an non issue. Do you recall Orphanbot at all - pretty much the same thing. Werdna is still quite active on WMF projects, he still runs Werdnabot (the talk page archive bot) and I have him on more than one contact list, contact isn't an issue AFAIS. Feel free to poke me if you have any other questions -- Tawker 06:26, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A problematic GA review

I was wondering if you might have the time to comment on the Agripinna opera GA review, the discussion is proving quite....contentious, and I think more editors might be able to help form a real supermajority one way or another. I have the feeling that a no consensus result isn't going to bode well :/. Homestarmy 18:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the heads-up

I already voted on that (support, of course). Daniel Case 23:27, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Leaving Wikipedia

I can see why you are leaving and don't blame you at all. Will add you to Missing Wikipedians (not now though) just so you won't be forgotten here.--HamedogTalk|@ 16:31, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I hope you won't leave

The point is that the poll was inflammatory and divisive and stated the issue in terms that most people find unfair. We are far from ready to have a proper poll on the issue, because a proper discussion has not been had in order to try to find consensus. The point is that it is a disrespect to valued contributors on all sides of the issue to bring an issue to a poll when there is clearly room to explore common ground.--Jimbo Wales 15:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I hope you don't leave too, you've done more things for Wikipedia than just talking about Fair Use rationals, who will run your wonderful and complex GA list updating script? Plus, i'll have one less person to call upon if there's another crazy GA review or something, these things only happen like once every month or something. :D Homestarmy 04:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
In regards to fair use and Wikipedia:Elimination of Fair Use Rationale in Promotional Photos/Vote, and the poll which was stopped.
Do you have a group, like WP:RC Patrol?
I have seen so many good editors leave because they have unpopular minority views. The majority has WP sites like WP:RC Patrol.
I was indefinetly booted for copyright violations myself, and am on self-imposed parol. (In fact I am going to message the person who unbooted from the indefinete boot about this message, just to give him a head up, so he can warn me if I am going over this self-imposed parol). Travb (talk) 15:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
User_talk:VoiceOfReason#Discussion_on_fair-use_policy_amendment Travb (talk) 22:51, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] In case you ever look again...

We could use some help getting your GA script to run, so far, I haven't been able to make it work, all the instructions for installing cURL only work for UNIX machines or other cool obscure OS's that aren't like Windows, so even after I discovered the way to make it bind to Perl, the cURL commands still won't work on my computer :/. Homestarmy 14:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, one of them was actually a Linux system command for copy, but now I don't even know what the files your script is copying are even for.... Homestarmy 02:48, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Revived discussion concerning fair use in portals

I am contacting everyone who participated in the discussion that became inactive in December. Due to the length of the previous discussion, I have proposed a new amendment and you like you to weigh in so that we may actually have a consensus on this matter as it doesn't seem there exists one either way. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/e/d/User_talk%7ECedars_f899.html"